Tim Waugh kirjoitti viestissään (lähetysaika tiistai, 26. kesäkuu 2007
15:27:33):
> If there is any possibility of using DocBook for the source format,
> don't forget ESR's excellent doclifter package. It does a really good
> job of translating man pages into DocBook -- and of course we already
> have the stylesheets to translate them back to groff format.
>
> Tim.
> */
That's what I'm using now and according to my tests it works really well. This
is how I'm going to implement the publication phase. But for editing, I think
DocBook might be a bit intimidating for users who are accustomed to wiki
markup.
That's why the idea currently is to use wiki markup as the source format, then
translate that into DocBook with (probably) the improved DocBook code from
last year's GSoC and then that DocBook into any other format needed.
But then the "life cycle" of a man page would be something like groff -> wiki
markup -> DocBook -> groff (or some other upstream format). And
guaranteeing "no loss of information" between three transformations is going
to be difficult.
So should the idea of using wiki markup be discarded completely? Should we use
DocBook as the source format and hope that people won't be too scared of
editing it? If we chose DocBook, we would have to do only two
transformations, groff -> DocBook -> groff, and guaranteeing consistency
would be much more simple.
--
Ville-Pekka Vainio
vpivaini cs helsinki fi